Talk:2011 United States public employee protests

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Neutrality[edit]

This short article appears to have significant NPOV issues. Phrases such as "pushing for legislation" triggered it for me. Thoughts? VQuakr (talk) 05:53, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From the NYT article: "Behind closed doors, Scott Walker, the Republican who has been governor for about six weeks, calmly described his intent to forge ahead with the plans that had set off the uprising: He wants to require public workers to pay more for their health insurance and pensions, effectively cutting the take-home pay of many by around 7 percent. He also wants to weaken most public-sector unions by sharply curtailing their collective bargaining rights, limiting talks to the subject of basic wages." Comparing "pushing for legislation" to the line from the Times article, it sounds like a fair description to me. Ghostofnemo (talk) 06:09, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It seems really well referenced. Are you disputing the neutrality of the news media, or do you feel the references are being misrepresented? Care to give some concrete examples? Ghostofnemo (talk) 14:59, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the phrase is neutral, as Governor Walker is actively promoting the bill that the state Senate had introduced. He has been interviewed several times where he praises SB11. User:Iac74205 —Preceding undated comment added 19:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC).[reply]

 Done::There is no doubt Walker and the other govs have been pushing for legislation but I see no real reason to hang a tag on this article for the sake of a few verbs. I rephrased and removed the language you have pointed out, as well as some you did not, then I Wikified the title, improved the cite formatting and removed the tags. -Regards-KeptSouth (talk) 12:39, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the follow up, I agree there is no reason to keep the tag on there forever if some more editors have had a look at it. Cheers! VQuakr (talk) 20:35, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

National Overview[edit]

We may want to create a national (US) overview here, as there is an article devoted to the Wis. protests in particular already. Perhaps create a topic structure, such as a summary at the top with sub-heads with more specific information on what is happening in each particular state, i.e., Ohio, Indiana, etc... I will do so in a few hours if no one else jumps on it. User:Iac74205 —Preceding undated comment added 18:30, 24 February 2011 (UTC).[reply]

The Wisconsin article is about the budget conflict, not the public employee protests, and it only deals with Wisconsin. Ghostofnemo (talk) 12:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I went ahead and restructured the article based on your wonderful ideas. Please assist in filling in the sections. ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 02:35, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: Third color in map[edit]

note: renamed section title from "Proposal" to "Proposal: Third color in map". Justin Ormont (talk)

I propose besides the red and golden colors, we add a 3rd color (preferably green), to represent states where laws have recently passed that restrict bargaining rights and effect unions. Wisconsin and Idaho could be a part of this category. S51438 (talk) 03:10, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I prefer the simplicity of the two. There is also disputes in at least Wisconsin whether the law was legally passed.[1] Alternatively we could just modify the legend to say something like "Proposed or recently passed legislation...". The map does need some cleanup though. At minimum the colors and text readability could be better. From the technical side, it may be hard to add another line to the legend due to lack of space. If we moved the map down slightly, the image map will no longer be aligned and when you click on a state, it won't go to the right section in the article. This can be overcome though. ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 05:25, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I lack the knowledge to do such a thing. What software did you use to make the map? On a side not, I find it irrelevant if the law was passed illegally because it will just be passed again if it is found to be illegal. S51438 (talk) 22:24, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I recommend using inkscape which is free software that is used to edit vector graphics. Also, I think having more than the two colors can cause issues. For instance, in Wisconsin, part of the bill was passed and part is still pending. What color would that be? Btw, I did make the legend smaller, and I think three lines can now reasonable fit incase we need it. ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 02:31, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that we should add color for states that have disallowed collective bargaining, whether a long time ago or recent. Wisconsin, Idaho, Texas, North Carolina and Virginia (and some more I might be forgetting). MAINEiac4434 (talk) 00:47, 16 March 2011 (UTC) note: indentation moved to lower level for better discussion threading. Justin Ormont (talk)[reply]
    • A second map may be better for this information. Perhaps a map of just states which disallow public employee collective bargaining. ~ Justin Ormont (talk) 03:36, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Cool, I'd back that. Could you, Justin, or someone else get on that? I'd do it myself but I don't know how. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 18:15, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/03/wisconsin_dems_ask_district_at.html

First Flight High School protest[edit]

I propose that the section First Flight High School be split into a new article titled '2011 First Flight High School student protests and walkouts'.

I agree. It's not clear this is directly related to public employees, and no news coverage yet, so it may not be notable. Ghostofnemo (talk) 13:13, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is notable, so much so that it may need to be slit into a new article, although I still think that would be to far to soon yet. I just noticed the section First Flight High School is becoming quite large; even lager is the section it is a part of North Carolina.--71.80.52.242 (talk) 17:24, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The First Flight High School section is sourced entirely with references to Facebook and YouTube, which are not considered reliable sources. Unless something better can be found, the section will have to be removed. Making a new article would prove problematic unless coverage can be found in reliable third party sources. --Diannaa (Talk) 01:28, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is there even any proposed/passed union-busting (pardon the lefty term, been spending too much time in front of the state house) legislation in North Carolina? Does the map need to be updated, or are these high schoolers just looking for an excuse to miss school? (Sorry, all options have to be explored). MAINEiac4434 (talk) 02:18, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on 2011 United States public employee protests. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:26, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2011_United_States_public_employee_protests&oldid=1196600830"